linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/spinlock_debug: avoid one thread can not obtain the spinlock for a long time.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140430060625.GV11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 Apr 2014 08:06:25 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	"Wang, Xiaoming" <xiaoming.wang@...el.com>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/spinlock_debug: avoid one thread can not obtain the
 spinlock for a long time.

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 01:04:31PM -0400, Wang, Xiaoming wrote:
> loops_per_jiffy is larger than expectation that possible
> causes one thread can not obtain the spin lock for a long time.
> So use cpu_clock() to reach timeout in one second which can
> avoid HARD LOCKUP.

This is just not making sense.. one thing is broken so then you tape on
another? Fix the first already.

Also, why do you care?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/